Prospects Will Break Your Heart

Top 101 Prospects

This list was conceptualized and constructed in late December, and finalized and submitted for Baseball Prospectus 2013 in early January. I have avoided it ever since out of revisionist fear. When this particular list was created, the Baseball Prospectus prospect crew was only two months into the team top 10 lists, having found our rhythm in the process but only scratched the surface of all the talent in the minors. With countless emails, calls, texts, IMs, letters, and Candygrams exchanged between members of the BP team and members of the baseball industry, we played prospect Nostradamus and worked ahead of the team lists, spelunking for information like we had never spelunked before. It was a stressful time, but also one of the most rewarding of my career, a daily debate about prospects that consumed all available energy and intellect. It was a prospect boot camp, and I loved every second of it.

Fast-forward two months, and I'm still thrilled with the rewards of the process and the overall plus-plus quality of the work; that conviction will never waver. But I’m also aware of the realities of such a project and saddled with the occasional second thought; not because the list is rife with unexplainable error or incompetence, but because appetite and approach evolve with each new influence, conversation, and exchange of information. At the time of construction, we had more than 100 names for the final 50 spots on the list, and you can make a reasonable and articulate case for each player’s inclusion. We picked up our phones, touched our fingers to keys, and put our collective heads together and carved out the following list, which I’m honored to stand by. That’s not to say that I haven’t thought about tweaks or trims...

I love Jurickson Profar, but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t give serious thought to fighting for Taveras for the no. 1 spot. Profar plays a premium position, can swing a great stick, and has a wonderful smile, so I’d be arguing an unwinnable case. But Taveras’ bat has a chance to stop wars (or start wars; whichever you prefer). I’ve never been more impressed with a young hitter than I am with Taveras. Watching him take a ball over the batter’s eye during batting practice at the Futures Game probably influenced this infatuation. I was attracted to him before, but after feeling his bat speed from 10 feet away, I started writing poetry in his name. His offensive potential is abnormal. That sh*t cray.

Courtney Hawkins: He’s a Texan with a ton of natural athleticism and power potential, but outside of my amateur sources, nobody wanted to turn up their microphones and be heard. Like the aforementioned 100 prospects that had a case to be on the back half of this list, Hawkins could just as easily be no. 60 as he could no. 101. If you believe in the bat, even from a corner spot, he belongs on the list. But if you have doubts about the overall promise of the stick and don’t like the direction the body is heading, even with the back-flipping athleticism that is currently present, the case for exclusion is just as strong and compelling. When I’m in the mood for ceiling, Hawkins belongs on the 101.

Why don’t people love Gerrit Cole? Is it the production? Is it the Southern California thing? I don’t get it. His on-paper stuff is the best in the minors. Is it because I have to say “on-paper stuff”? Okay, I get it.

Addison Russell (the shortstop) is a top-20 prospect. He should probably be higher. If the body is shortstop legit and the bat continues to progress, he could be no. 1 on the list next year. He’s that guy. Several scouts weren’t ready to go all-in yet because of the physical profile; mostly scouts who had eyes on Russell as an amateur and saw a thick upper body and lateral range that looked destined to leave the middle for the hot corner down the line.

If this were just the “Jason Parks makes a list of 101 prospects without any outside input or influence” list, I’d rank Chris Archer even higher. He’s not a teenager and the gap between present and future isn’t extreme, but so what? Have you seen him pitch? His stuff is NC-17 and can flash snuff film potential. The command needs work and the changeup is more flash than sustainable fire, but the slider is one of the best secondary offerings from a young arm you will see, and the fastball isn’t ordering from the kid’s menu. He might be my favorite young pitcher to watch in action. He’s either a no. 2 starter or one of the better late-inning relievers in the game. I’m smitten.

Adalberto Mondesi might seem like a guy with helium based on his on-the-field statistics/age. I don’t care about his numbers. Go watch this kid. Those who have seen him in person know what I’m talking about. He has “it,” and you know what that looks like when you see it. It’s part instinct and part tools, but it's full prospect. He’s special. Even if the production slumps in full-season ball, keep him on the radar. He has high-end impact potential. It’s there. Just wait.

Jesse Biddle might be too high, but my sources were high on him and I didn’t fight against it. It’s not special, but it has a very good chance to be solid, and that has a ton of value. Jason the ceiling horse isn’t overly impressed.

Robert Stephenson will be at least 30 spots higher in 2014. Maybe he should be that high now. Love the arm; love the approach.

Dan Straily. I wasn’t thrilled about putting him on the list in the first place, but I get it. He’s a very safe major-league starter, and even though the stuff isn’t crazy, it’s deep and very functional. I will admit a bias against safe and secure in favor of high and hazardous. It’s just my bag, man. I have a taste for high ceilings.

Rymer Liriano will miss the season after Tommy John surgery. While I'm sure it would affect his immediate ranking, its hard for me to gauge by how much. Obviously, the recovery will take a full season and the arm strength/accuracy could be slow to come back, but the hit/power/run tools should be able to stay in the same general range. This gives me hope that his status will recover. It's a setback and it sucks, but I don't think it's soul-crushing for his prospect status.

Lewis Brinson: He has the skills to be the top prospect in the Rangers system next year, and at least 50 spots higher on the 101 list. He’s a high-risk prospect, so let’s not start exchanging promise rings yet. But the tools are loud and the projection extreme, so when and if it clicks, it has a chance to be disturbingly good. A role 7 (all-star) future isn’t a drug-fueled hallucination. Everything else I write that is non-baseball related might be, though. Just a heads-up.

Yasiel Puig: Who knows? He’s either too high or too low. Sources either think he’s a no-brainer role 6 player or a guy who is all hype and will eventually bust before reaching the majors. Very little in between.

Just one thought ,when reading your top 11 for eachh Org. I came to the conclusion ,Noah Syndergaard and Archie Bradley where the same person, therefore it was gratafying to see them so closely matched on your 101. Do you give the edge to Syndergaard because of likely home park effect, or Parkes effect, see what I did there, going to tke one of these tall flamethrowes in a dynasty league , if you had too which one would you take ? thanks.

Bradley has slightly better overall stuff that he still needs to harness and a slightly higher ceiling. Syndergaard throws more strikes and is the safer bet to be a productive major leaguer. My gut says Syndergaard.

I always feel like these lists reach a point where the difference between #60 and #80 ranked prospects is actually very small,while the difference between #1 and #20 is pretty huge. Do you care to comment on roughly where you see this happening on this list? I guess I'm asking where you feel the break point is between the elite and the hopefuls?

Thanks to everybody on the prospect team for the great series this year.

Professor and Co., thank you for all the diligent work and for this list. Lists are snapshots of where players stand RIGHT NOW, but I still love reading them.
This is tremendous stuff and I think I speak for all BP readers when I say THANK YOU!!

We all know (and this supports) TINSTAAP, but given these wild swings in rankings, and general uncertainty with them, perhaps the pitchers should all be discounted heavily to begin with, and less pronouncement placed on most recent year's performance

Keep in mind there is some noise in the rankings in that the comparison is going from the work product of one evaluator to the work product of another. To some extent, there is going to be fluctuation based solely on Goldstein and Parks viewing the prospect landscape through different lenses.

The conversations the prospect team had regarding to this list almost never made arguments for or against players based primarily on their most recent performance. These were high level looks at each full player profile and detailed discussions as to what separated those profiles.

I'm not that high on the guy based on the (limited) reports I received while researching the Dodgers list. Obviously knows how to pitch, but its more pitchability than stuff and that shrinks the error margin. I might be too low on him, but I haven't seen enough to write the report in ink.

Elsewhere Jason has said that Xander's ranking is about the bat. Obviously he is more valuable as a middle infielder, but it's the bat that is elite, and the bat that drives his ranking. Bottom line is that he's a top 5 bat in the minors so position is only moving the needle 2-5 spots.

Hadn't heard the bad news on Liriano, that's a terrible way to start my week. My observation on him is that it's always taken him some time to adjust at each level. Does that profile concern you more than usual for a player missing a season due to injury?

The list itself is a lot of fun, but will take time to digest and will have a lot of on-going value as a reference point.

The notes, however, are pure gold and provide instant satisfaction; well done. If there happen to be more notes that were left on the cutting-room floor, I recommend publishing them in a separate article.

Yea, people were saying he might be an absolute stud. What I don't understand is that after the increase in level he struggled a lot the first couple of months, but then played really well the rest of the year. It feels like his first month or two should be discounted a little because he was able to make the adjustments. Seems a little much to go from #18 to off the list for a decent overall season.

Enjoying digesting the list. This is not a criticism, but for me this current list epitomizes how Baseball Prospectus has evolved over the years. I am sure that a decade ago, someone like Adam Eaton would have been reasonably high on the list based on performance metrics. Now probably more of an emphasis on tools and scouting. Full circle to some extent.

JBJ is likely to give you the quicker return and is a safer bet to be a solid contributor in average, runs and some SB. Cowart has a wider gap between current value and future potential but has the higher fantasy ceiling because of the power potential. Cowart carries more risk, and isn't likely a significant producer in 2013 or 2014, but could be a valuable trade chip during those seasons.

If you don't need help soon, you can stash Cowart. If you're looking for contributions over the next 18 months, JBJ is the better bet.

Hmm really?! I was thinking it was almost the exact opposite because of the lack of third base presence in LAA so if Cowart plays well he could push himself up there this year. Where in BOS it feels like there are so many OFs, he would not only have to play really well, but also hope for an opening. Is Bradley a good reason not to sign Ellsbury long term?

The Ellsbury question will come down to internal valuation, but JBJ is closer to MLB ready than is Cowart. The path may be cleaner for Cowart, but if the profile isn't there for him to succeed, it doesn't matter, right? That said, if Cowart were to make a large developmental jump at Double-A, sure, he'd potentially be positioned to make an impact more quickly.

I forgot I had looked at this before. lol Bradley might be closer, but he doesn't have any great or even pretty good skills fantasy wise. In the top 10 it says about Bradley,"most likely a single-digit home run threat" & "could steal some bases despite average speed" Seems very little upside so I'm inclined to pick Cowart.

Thanks for the replies! Not trying to argue, but really enjoy the discussion because, I was thinking about trading for the pick behind me in my minor league draft.

I'm not a fantasy expert by any means, but I assume AL only would mean the threshold for "productive player" is lower from a counting stat perspective. In the usual categories, he could have upside around .285+ BA, 90+ R, 60+ RBI, 8-12 HR (considering home park), and 20 SB. Not a world beater, but a fine little player.

Quite amazed you have Tyler Thornburg on the list. From initial impressions and impressions among scouts, he seems destined for the bullpen. I was not at all impressed with his debut last year, and felt he had a ton of work to do before proving he was bound for the rotation, or worthy of top prospect status.

Almora, Hedges, Baez, Sano would naturally slide up depending on who graduates. There is potential for one or two draft-eligibles to debut that high (though no one is close a lock at this point). Could see big jumps from high-ceiling guys like Rendon, Correa, Soler, etc.

Nice! FOUR Mets in the top 100! Now that's exciting. And three in the top 30.. In my young life, we've never had this many top prospects.. Ones that are legit, not overhyped (Lastings M F-Mart.. Big Pelf) at least.

I can't really think of many players with all-star ceilings that didn't get a mention on the list. Rare types. You can go very low in the minors with guys like Sanchez and Gohara in the Mariners system, but the list is very short.

Think you are being a bit tough here Mr. Parks.. He did say if everything goes perfect... And to that degree think many of the HS arms from the 2012 draft class have that upside: Smoral, Berrios, Hensly, Sims... all have perfect world 7 updside right?

Ok not talking about anyone specific but defining a 7 level pitcher...95MPH fastball, above average change, average curve and above average control/command with average pitch-ability.... Would that qualify?

Sure. On most team rankings, the "On the Rise" types are usually low-level dreams that could become bigger prospects in 2013. I tend to favor the high ceiling types for that section, so you will find a high number of high risk/high reward types.

Thanks for your efforts, Jason. I'm generally more interested in descriptions than rankings, because it's so tough to predict what's going to become of these guys or to compare players who are different ages and positions. That said, why do you consider Wacha an ever so slightly better prospect than fellow first-round pick Fried? I wouldn't be surprised if Wacha has a better career (for all we know Fried won't get past Double-A), but I assumed Fried had a higher ceiling.

Sonny Gray has way more stuff than Straily. I assume questions about his ability to remain a starter pushed him off the top 101?

And what about Grant Green aren't you a fan of? The defensive skills at 2B? A few places, including Billy Owens and a recent fangraphs profile, threw a Michael Young hit-tool label on him, which is big praise.

Fringe players don' get much love. If Green was a better prospect he'd get more prospect love. He has a chance to be a second division type. That's the reality of the skill-set. He's a white, hit-tool first 2B type that was originally a SS, so the Michael Young comps are obvious and easy. It doesn't mean Green is going to be Michael Young.

Seems like there is an unusually large number of third basemen high on the list when the position is already pretty deep at the MLB level. How many of them will have to move before they get to the show permanently? Also seems like the list is lighter than usual on LHPs

Shouldn't organizations factor in more? Consider Nick Castellanos who, by many accounts, is at least adequate defensively at third base. But, he's been moved to the outfield through no real fault of his own, but because the Tigers moved Miguel Cabrera over. Would Castellanos be higher than #37 if not for the change?

No. Olt is a similar. Very good 3B, but unlikely to play much 3B because of Beltre at the major league level. This doesn't influence his ranking, though. The scouting report is about the player, not the org.

48 to 52. This is the split between pitchers and hitters. It's not simply BP, but all prospectors seem to be rating pitchers on par with hitters.

Using WAR, and a lazy line of "the top 50 VORP" for each pitcher and hitter we see the 50th ranked hitter comes in with 31.6 (Alex Gordon) and the 50th ranked pitcher comes in with 16.9 (Chad Billingsley).

Thus, if hitters are generally twice as valuable as pitchers, should we see a similar split within the top 100 of any prospect list?

Great point, and that's at the MLB level, and ignores the higher (I believe, based on TNSAPP, but don't actually have data in front of me) failure rate of pitching prospects to become even fringe MLB players.

1) In order to have any VORP, you have to get to the majors. Most ML teams carry 12 pitchers, which is 48% of their roster. So that's not out of line.
2)If anything, there should be more pitching prospects, because there will be a higher rate of attrition among pitchers, whether through catastrophic injury or just completely losing it.
3) It is easier to find pitching prospects because of the nature of prospects. The flaws in a hitting prospect - lack of power, speed, selectivity, positional value - are not easy to overlook. You can project some added power, but if someone can't run or field, there is little to no reason to expect improvement, so they get downgraded. But if a pitcher has quality stuff, you can project better command, you can hope he masters a breaking ball or changeup, and if not, he could still end up in the pen. It's just easier to wishcast pitchers.
4) Because of 3 above, the list is unbalanced. 14 of the top 21 are hitters, 25 of the top 40 are hitters. But after that, it swings to pitchers, because it's easier to see the route to the majors if they add something.

Does a location guy like Seth Maness have a chance to make this list next year, offsetting a low K rate and a fastball maxing out in the upper 80s with otherworldly control (only 15 bb in 222 ip in A/AA, or 0.6/9)?

Follow up on Russell, if I may. I've seen both Russell and Correa receive glowing write ups highlighting their ability to provide plus offense at shortstop. How much separates these guys? Is it the evaluation of risk (Russell as medium and moving up fast, Correa high but with solid makeup)?

Professor, wonderful list and many thanks. You have stated a number of times that the list was done some time ago and prospects are always moving. Which guy or guys has moved up the most and which guy or guys have moved down the most since compilation?